Why does anyone NEED an assault rifle?

[phrodeau]

So we need to ban cell phones too. Is that what you're saying?

Motor Vehicle Collisions caused by cell phone use kill on average 11 children EVERY SINGLE DAY. Where is your Public Outcry over that one?? Where are your demands for "common sense" laws? Where is your March for Life?

Motor Vehicle Collision in general caused over 40,000 deaths last year. Most common vehicle involved in crashes? BMW. Why aren't we banning BMWs? Where is your "visceral emotional response"? Where are your teenage crash survivors marching on Washington?

Where is your "common sense"? Stuffed up Hillary's fat ass. THAT's where.

You can't have a twenty-foot-wide bumper on the front of your car, and if you exceed the speed limit you get fined. Would you want to see tank-sized vehicles flying past your driveway at eighty MPH?

 

[My I]

You can't have a twenty-foot-wide bumper on the front of your car, and if you exceed the speed limit you get fined. Would you want to see tank-sized vehicles flying past your driveway at eighty MPH?

Dude, the drugs are seriously frying your brain. Grow up and be... less stupid.

 

[KimGordon67]

So we need to ban cell phones too. Is that what you're saying?

Motor Vehicle Collisions caused by cell phone use kill on average 11 children EVERY SINGLE DAY. Where is your Public Outcry over that one?? Where are your demands for "common sense" laws? Where is your March for Life?

Motor Vehicle Collision in general caused over 40,000 deaths last year. Most common vehicle involved in crashes? BMW. Why aren't we banning BMWs? Where is your "visceral emotional response"? Where are your teenage crash survivors marching on Washington?

Where is your "common sense"? Stuffed up Hillary's fat ass. THAT's where.

That 11 children a day figure seems very high. Where's your citation for that?

 

[Hypoxia]

You can't have a twenty-foot-wide bumper on the front of your car, and if you exceed the speed limit you get fined

Unless you're doing demolition derby. Then its OK, if unlikely.

Would you want to see tank-sized vehicles flying past your driveway at eighty MPH?

Armored vehicles usually only reach that velocity when dropped from a height, like 'accidentally' spilling from a cargo plane over Tennessee and crushing innocent hillbillies. I suppose a few JATO units cold propel an Abrams at a good clip at Bonneville. Tear up the salt, though.

If only Moses had some AKs, those Egyptians would have stood no chance.

 

[My I]

Concealed Carry interest spikes 100% nationwide, nearly 300% in Ohio.

There is a hell of a lot of BULLSHIT in this article. But it comes from The Giffords camp so that's to be expected.

 

[gunthernehmen]

That 11 children a day figure seems very high. Where's your citation for that?

I like statistics. A good statistician can support two, completely different viewpoints with the same dataset.

Around 2 3/4 children die in auto accidents each day(1). So, since the Parkland shooting, about 150 kids have died. Sure, that's less than the 550 someone suggested (at 11 / day) but don't those 150 kids matter to anyone?

Around 9 people (any age) are killed each day by distracted driving(2). Maybe cell phone, maybe taking your eyes off the road to admire scenery or change the station on the radio. That's 450 deaths. But hey, distraction happens. We'll never eliminate that.

But around 28 people die every day due to drunk driving(3). That's 1,400 dead since the date of the Parkland shooting. Let that number sink in for a second. That's one hundred times. One HUNDRED times as many people dead as the number of children that died in that shooting.

I don't mean in the slightest to say that those 14 kids don't matter. What I am saying is, the priorities of our government. The priorities of these special interest groups like MDA. The priorities of the thousands of facebook addicts endlessly spouting memes and hate filled messages. These priorities are horribly, tragically misplaced. You don't solve problems by tackling the smallest issues first. You find areas that will actually make a difference and tackle THOSE.

(1) https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/04/cdc-too-many-kids-die-unbuckled/5204127/

(2) https://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/distracted_driving/index.html

(3) https://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html

 

[Carnal_Flower]

It's not either/or.

First of all, If you prefer to advocate on behalf of auto accidents, go for it. No one's saying you can't, and we won't attack you for ignoring mass shootings.

Second of all, it's not about how many people have died, it's about how they died.

For example, how many people died in 2001 from car crashes vs. the 3,000 who died in the Twin Towers? It's not about sheer numbers, is it?

Third of all, what about the opioid epidemic, which has now surpassed car deaths as the #1 killer in the US? What about all those people? Why aren't you asking about that?

Conclusion: this is nothing but whataboutism.

I like statistics. A good statistician can support two, completely different viewpoints with the same dataset.

Around 2 3/4 children die in auto accidents each day(1). So, since the Parkland shooting, about 150 kids have died. Sure, that's less than the 550 someone suggested (at 11 / day) but don't those 150 kids matter to anyone?

Around 9 people (any age) are killed each day by distracted driving(2). Maybe cell phone, maybe taking your eyes off the road to admire scenery or change the station on the radio. That's 450 deaths. But hey, distraction happens. We'll never eliminate that.

But around 28 people die every day due to drunk driving(3). That's 1,400 dead since the date of the Parkland shooting. Let that number sink in for a second. That's one hundred times. One HUNDRED times as many people dead as the number of children that died in that shooting.

I don't mean in the slightest to say that those 14 kids don't matter. What I am saying is, the priorities of our government. The priorities of these special interest groups like MDA. The priorities of the thousands of facebook addicts endlessly spouting memes and hate filled messages. These priorities are horribly, tragically misplaced. You don't solve problems by tackling the smallest issues first. You find areas that will actually make a difference and tackle THOSE.

(1) https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/04/cdc-too-many-kids-die-unbuckled/5204127/

(2) https://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/distracted_driving/index.html

(3) https://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html

 

[todski28]

It's not either/or.

First of all, If you prefer to advocate on behalf of auto accidents, go for it. No one's saying you can't, and we won't attack you for ignoring mass shootings.

Second of all, it's not about how many people have died, it's about how they died.

For example, how many people died in 2001 from car crashes vs. the 3,000 who died in the Twin Towers? It's not about sheer numbers, is it?

Third of all, what about the opioid epidemic, which has now surpassed car deaths as the #1 killer in the US? What about all those people? Why aren't you asking about that?

Conclusion: this is nothing but whataboutism.

Correct it really is, whataboutism, why is there a screaming haikstorm of vergal assault on guns and assualting masculinity when pretty much all the shooters have come from single mother households, and all of them have been on ssris, how has it become a cultural phenomenon,

Its like treating a melanoma by cutting out the secondary cancer and hoping for the best.

It is a systemic root cause problem that banning guns will not fix

 

[Carnal_Flower]

I meant his post about car crashes is just whataboutism that has no relevance to the problem of gun violence.

You view assaulting guns as assaulting masculinity? Proof!

Correct it really is, whataboutism, why is there a screaming haikstorm of vergal assault on guns and assualting masculinity when pretty much all the shooters have come from single mother households, and all of them have been on ssris, how has it become a cultural phenomenon,

Its like treating a melanoma by cutting out the secondary cancer and hoping for the best.

It is a systemic root cause problem that banning guns will not fix

 

[JayPierce95]

In your answer you point out that the shooters have been men, so clearly there is an issue how certain young men are being raised in this country. There is a major issue in this country with mental disabilities that are not treated correctly that account for a lot of unnecessary violence. However, it would be ignorant to say that a gun does not empower people who want to do harm to go through with their plans. The gun is what allows them to perform their action and empowers them to do it. Those same young men are not using knives to kill a dozen people, even though they realistically could. A semi-automatic rifle is a source of empowerment that allows virtually anyone to wield the power of life and death over dozens of innocent people. It is practically impossible to predict and prevent the people with the specific mental disorders inside of them that would allow them to even consider committing such violence.

 

[todski28]

In your answer you point out that the shooters have been men, so clearly there is an issue how certain young men are being raised in this country. There is a major issue in this country with mental disabilities that are not treated correctly that account for a lot of unnecessary violence. However, it would be ignorant to say that a gun does not empower people who want to do harm to go through with their plans. The gun is what allows them to perform their action and empowers them to do it. Those same young men are not using knives to kill a dozen people, even though they realistically could. A semi-automatic rifle is a source of empowerment that allows virtually anyone to wield the power of life and death over dozens of innocent people. It is practically impossible to predict and prevent the people with the specific mental disorders inside of them that would allow them to even consider committing such violence.

Im advocating that taking away the gun and it will change to knives.

Taking away the guns will fix a now problem and may help some of those people who have suffered because of this, but it is only a stepling stone.

If the underlying cause is not fixed, then its only a bandaid.

Have you seen a skilled knifeman in action?
I guarantee the carnage from knife attacks if executed properly will be far more dangerous than the guns themselves.

Look up accuthesia induced by ssris and have some further food for thought

I actually am on the fence about gun control I have no stake in the claim to be honest, but there is more underlying the phenomenon that the amendment, and the shooters.

 

[JayPierce95]

Im advocating that taking away the gun and it will change to knives.

Taking away the guns will fix a now problem and may help some of those people who have suffered because of this, but it is only a stepling stone.

If the underlying cause is not fixed, then its only a bandaid.

Have you seen a skilled knifeman in action?
I guarantee the carnage from knife attacks if executed properly will be far more dangerous than the guns themselves.

Look up accuthesia induced by ssris and have some further food for thought

I actually am on the fence about gun control I have no stake in the claim to be honest, but there is more underlying the phenomenon that the amendment, and the shooters.

Exactly... a "skilled knifeman." With an assault rifle, you don't need to be skilled. I believe in the second amendment, and I know about assault rifles because I've shot them at the range before... that's how I know that they require basically no skill to use. If those kids were skilled, the death tolls would have been much higher. With a knife, you need to be skilled. Guns are the "great equalizer" because anybody of any size or age can easily take down somebody bigger.

I agree that people do not spend nearly enough time trying to solve the "why". But there also needs to be a detailed inquiry into and regulation of the "how". It is hard to stay focused on solving mental health and opioid use when a school shooting and its fallout dominates the headlines constantly.

 

[todski28]

Exactly... a "skilled knifeman." With an assault rifle, you don't need to be skilled. I believe in the second amendment, and I know about assault rifles because I've shot them at the range before... that's how I know that they require basically no skill to use. If those kids were skilled, the death tolls would have been much higher. With a knife, you need to be skilled. Guns are the "great equalizer" because anybody of any size or age can easily take down somebody bigger.

I agree that people do not spend nearly enough time trying to solve the "why". But there also needs to be a detailed inquiry into and regulation of the "how". It is hard to stay focused on solving mental health and opioid use when a school shooting and its fallout dominates the headlines constantly.

Whilst i agree with the main point about the equalizer of ole point and shoot

The root cause why should be as prevalent as the how, they coincide.

It takes about three months of solid practice to get good enough with a knife to fuck up a lot of people. These people often brood and write diary entries etc for months even years documenting their hatred and resentment of society. Take that time and a focused mind and you eill become quite deadly with a knife before you know it.

When did the shootings start, what has put this pressure onto these young men?

I still suggest the drum beating needs to be more inclusive, the nuance of the why is as important as the how

 

[KeithD]

Im advocating that taking away the gun and it will change to knives.

Let's get real here. No one's going to kill as many with a knife in three days that he could kill in three minutes and from a distance with an AR-15. Nothing in the 2nd Amendment says a civilian has a right to own, specifically, an AR-15. Let's not be stupid about this.

 

[todski28]

Let's get real here. No one's going to kill as many with a knife in three days that he could kill in three minutes and from a distance with an AR-15. Nothing in the 2nd Amendment says a civilian has a right to own, specifically, an AR-15. Let's not be stupid about this.

So your main concern is controlling guns and not saving lives?

Have you ever simulated real life combat situations?

I used to work as a club bouncer in a 5 year streak we had the highest rates of assault, battery and police call outs in our state, in a testing situation I could normally slash up 8 to 9 people trying to disarm me in under 2 minutes.

The difference between knife and gun is only the distance. a knife attack is designed to be felt not seen or heard, the rule of thumb is always slash never stab, and ensure your blades are razor sharp

I truly believe in a school classroom with intent I could kill or seriously injure at least 15 people,

Takes way more guts to use a lnife because of the personal nature of it. In all lnife simulations the safest course of action was do not engage or you need a weapon with longer range.

Lets not kid ourselves here the root cause is more important to stopping all violence that the gun bans.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Nothing in the 2nd Amendment says a civilian has a right to own, specifically, an AR-15. Let's not be stupid about this.

AR15's are arms last I checked.....so yea it's got more coverage than not which is why the anti 2A rights people have such an impossible time getting rid of them.

The only people being stupid about this are the ones pretending 2A doesn't say exactly what it says.

 

[My I]

So your main concern is controlling guns and not saving lives?

Have you ever simulated real life combat situations?

I used to work as a club bouncer in a 5 year streak we had the highest rates of assault, battery and police call outs in our state, in a testing situation I could normally slash up 8 to 9 people trying to disarm me in under 2 minutes.

The difference between knife and gun is only the distance. a knife attack is designed to be felt not seen or heard, the rule of thumb is always slash never stab, and ensure your blades are razor sharp

I truly believe in a school classroom with intent I could kill or seriously injure at least 15 people,

Takes way more guts to use a lnife because of the personal nature of it. In all lnife simulations the safest course of action was do not engage or you need a weapon with longer range.

Lets not kid ourselves here the root cause is more important to stopping all violence that the gun bans.

2014 PA knife attack seriously injures 22

How quickly they forget.

The root cause of these attacks whether by AR15, Glock pistol, knife, bomb, bottles of acid, etc., is mental illness. People who are mentally disturbed and have violent tendencies need to be taken off the streets. Teachers see these kids every day. They should be watching for that "Loner" behavior and the violent tendencies and report it. Then DO something about the report. There may be some of them that can be helped, some not. But get them away from other children until you can make that determination.

Punish the criminals, not the innocent. The simple fact that people don't seem to understand that concept tells me their arguments have NOTHING to do with the children.

 

[gunthernehmen]

I meant his post about car crashes is just whataboutism that has no relevance to the problem of gun violence.

You view assaulting guns as assaulting masculinity? Proof!

Actually, somebody asked for cites on how many kids are killed by distracted drivers and I got a little carried away.

However, the bottom line is that people are going to people, which means they will commit violence upon other people. That is not going to change, as long as there are people in this planet. Whether they kill each other with guns, knives or by flying planes into sky scrapers, they will try to kill each other.

You can't stop or solve this.

You CAN punish those that do.

You CAN try to identify those that appear to be truly unhinged and try prevent them from doing so.

At the same time, you can't punish someone for something that they haven't yet done, so some of these future tragedies, even if we know if them, are still going to find a way to kill.

The parkland shooter is someone that ought to have been noticed. Should he have been sitting in a jail cell or a locked Ward?

 

[gunthernehmen]

For the record, there is a much better solution to the problem than banning guns or alcohol or opioids.

Orgasms release endorphins and make people happy.

Happy people tend to kill less people than sad or depressed people.

The solution is clearly, more orgasms.

I offer my services (I don't mean paid services, it's just a term!) to provide orgasms to those in need. I do retain a right to refuse, cuz not everybody tickles my tonsils, but by and large, I'm happy to provide orgasms upon request.

Most of these people are guys and that's fine, but I'm not leaving you ladies out in the cold either, so if you, anyone feels they'd be in a better frame of mind with an orgasm or two to perk you up, drop me a line

 

[phrodeau]

(edited)
2014 PA knife attack seriously injures 22

They got better.

 

[My I]

You view assaulting guns as assaulting masculinity? Proof!

Only someone who jerks off to guns would spend $4k on an Armani suit.

Did I say little metal stick? I meant pathetic penis substitute for insecure "males."

Ooooh, is that a threat? Sounds like you have an aggression problem, who would have guessed. Are you sure you aren't cheering on the mass murderers?

Liberal snowflake asshole is much better than babykiller, big man

Your definition of mentally disturbed individuals should expand to include people like yourself who have a pathological obsession with the power of your weapon. You should all be in a national data base of mentally unstable people prohibited from owning firearms.

These are just my favorites. There's lot's more scattered through 40 pages.

It's a typical Liberal tactic. Avoid addressing the actual point by redirecting the conversation in a different direction, misquoting your opponent to try and tell people he said something he didn't and when all else fails through childish insults at them to piss them off.

 

[My I]

They got better.

OH? Do those scars from being slashed and stabbed go away after a couple weeks? But they didn't die right? That makes it ok. Right?

Dumbass.

 

[todski28]

These are just my favorites. There's lot's more scattered through 40 pages.

It's a typical Liberal tactic. Avoid addressing the actual point by redirecting the conversation in a different direction, misquoting your opponent to try and tell people he said something he didn't and when all else fails through childish insults at them to piss them off.

Its the current state of discourse if you cant win on merit, if you cant bring up valid points, cry, sling out accusations character assainate so you can avoid having your feelings hurt by possibly seeing a different point of view,

It isnt just far lefts its also now happening on the right, intellectual discourse is revolving around how someone feels as opposed to objective reality.

A pathological feminization of society. Because we attack all aspects of masculinity as if men in and of themselves are toxic but we do not address toxic femininity.

The female address of power is social ostraciztion and character assaination to cut you off from the group. Its uswd as a means of emotional control and manipulation.

Where as masculine is hyper agressive and violent, the affect of both is just as damaging.

The balance of masculine and feminine is fucked based on ideological obsession with gender politics. Thw qhole driving force of society is based in our ability to have rational discourse, feelings based arguements and hiding behind emotional shields "think of the children" shuts up those with empathy and ruins the validity of arguementation.....

Who's for kids being shot?
Who's for watching yoing men kill themselves
and others?

So hiding behind a wall of virtue signalling shames and silences rational discourse and the laws pass without proper discussion. Its a loop hole in democratic principals. I say we need to fuck of empathy as a discussion director.

These are broad accusations and I would like to see a good solid rebuttal to then

 

[phrodeau]

We could ban single mothers, if that would help. Shotgun weddings maybe? Stop sending fathers off to war?

 

[todski28]

We could ban single mothers, if that would help. Shotgun weddings maybe? Stop sending fathers off to war?

Lol banning single mothers is probably a great place to at least start. But I guess this is digression off the main topic, despite the plausible linkages.